Since we're always hungering for more PlayStation 3 information, we were delighted to learn that Izumi Kawanishi, the head of the Software Platform division of SCEI, gave a lengthy interview to Impress Watch.
Doesnt sony reveal the rsx specs even after the console is released i dont understand, they must be hiding something.
I mean if the ps3 cell and rsx is "twice" as power as the 360 & Wii as sony likes to claim, then why not tell all about the specs???
i dont think they will ever let the specs of the rsx out, the split memory will cause enough problems as it is, come out of the closet sony :p
Still no RSX facts?
It's like the Wii/supercharged Gamecube coverup, they can't cope with the 360's GPU that's why they're covering up.
What worries further is:
"The web browser can open up to 6 pages simultaneously. 64MB memory is always reserved for the browser, the instant messenger and other XMB OS activity even while in game."
So 64 MB of the memory is always reserved, read not being possible used by gaming tasks, for the web browser...
Already having the need to get around the bottleneck of split memory with a workaround (will it work flawlessly?), there is 64 MB from one part of total memory, which is 256, taken.
192 MB on the one end, 256 MB on the other. I don't know Sony you should focus on gaming with a console we already have a PC to do the browsing!
it's becoming a trade off this way. I even get the feeling they need to give some extra's like browsing because they know they fall short on delivering the best gaming experience, which the 360 has.
that the 360 OS uses at least 32MB of RAM (and that was at the beginning). And dont think that it hasnt grown at least a few more megabytes since then, since these updates can easily grow the size of the OS. So give it a rest. And you can easily store textures in the system RAM on the PC, its just that since most system RAM on the PC is so much slower than the local RAM on the gfx card, most developers prefer not to do that. However on the PS3, the system RAM runs at 3.2GHz (which is even faster than the VRAM, which runs at 700MHz, but it probably has a narrower bus than the VRAM), but its still faster than the average system RAM on the PC, so its more plausible to do on the PS3 than it would be on the average PC. And im sure that, this is not the only way they can use system RAM as gfx memory
"that the 360 OS uses at least 32MB of RAM"
O and the updates are very very very small files actually.
The PlayStation 3 has 256MBs of Rambus XDR memory and 256MBs of GDDR3 memory dedicated to graphics. Nvidia claims that the RSX can take advantage of the combined 512MBs of memory, since it is capable of writing directly to system memory. The increased graphics-memory bandwidth and storage space will let developers use high-resolution textures and enable antialiasing to provide detailed, jaggy-free graphics. The RSX's programmable shader capabilities greatly increase graphics efficiency and will let game developers use advanced effects such as subsurface scattering to simulate human skin.
Still the memory isn't all unified. So they need a workaround. What if the texture won't fit in the 256 MB... Then they cut it up? Send it completely to the other 256 MB?
And still there is the constant web browsing functionality eating up 64 MB all the time.
Too bad guys the PS3 isn't optimalized for games
Who gives a s*** about all this! I believe that as consumer everyone is entitle to know the specs of the device they are buying. Is this even legal? How is Sony or any company going to tell me that I don't have the right to know about a device that I'm paying $600 bucks. You Sony fanboys are ridiculous. Whats there to hide?
...the 360 can do ALL of that, AND THEN some. Everything about the 360 was custom built from state-of-the-art tech, for GAMING.
the mart you moron, you dont believe that a texture can be 256mb big ? lol you are a joke. ps3 is far better than your ms crapbox!
a 256MB texture ! fear ! it's coming !
lmfao, you don't even know what you're talking about :/
Thwip: "...the 360 can do ALL of that, AND THEN some. Everything about the 360 was custom built from state-of-the-art tech, for GAMING."
He's basically saying that the 360 is capable of everything the PS3 has been showing us, but that the developers just choose not to. Kind of a bleak outlook, don't you think? =P
They don't "cut" textures up. I guess you don't quite understand what GPUs do, which is beyond just storing textures. A lot of what GPU RAM is used for is doing complex shader calculations, rendering, skinning vertices, etc. PS3 has twice the RAM bandwidth and CPU<->GPU bandwidth of the 360, so splitting up the memory pools actually gave the PS3 double the performance in that regard.
The RSX can access data stored in XDR memory faster than the Xenos can from its GDDR3 memory. And you forget, the Cell can also do GPU work since there's some overlap between SPU and RSX functions (such as vertex skinning, texturing, volumetrics, and full-blown rendering). They basically told us everything we need to know about a year and a half ago. And considering that nVidia is probably including RSX features in its future GPU cards, it's understandable why they don't want to go too in-depth since ATI is a big rival. Simply put, they gave us more than enough information.
Come on, 3500 man-years of work on the RSX and some people still can't accept how the industry works.
For Bladestar, you can't actually sue unless the company released false information about a product that swindled you into purchasing it. It also depends on the product, and withholding what the company deems 'trade secrets' from the public is justifiable under law. Nintendo didn't tell me how my Gameboy works at a detailed technical level. Should I sue them for that? =P
When you offer a product you must disclose what it is.
Sony is calling the PS3 a COMPUTER. So when you call Dell and order a PC they tell you what type of GPU you will be getting. So why is Sony not telling us?
It seems very fishy. M$ told us what GPU they were going to have very early. And they were very proud to let the info out. Why are they holding out?
For get RAM DJ that is system memory and Sony is trying to confuse people with that. If you strip it down what GPU will you find?
We do not know because they do not want us too. And that is silly for real.
I have a feeling that 98% of all people wouldn't even understand the information if they released it. This isn't a big deal to most people, they just want their games.
RSX annoys the crap out of xbots.
"byyy, what's the magic making those awesome graphicz. I demand to know so I could downplay it with BS and shiz!"
Only thing you need to know it's about RSX is to watch the game you're playing on PS3. It would be different if it makes you loose your teeth and possible gives you diarhea, and it's not mentioned in specs.
because if you look at them with your eyes and not your preference, you'd see that both systems are basically the same graphically. and once again, graphics come down to the devs choice of style and what effort they choose to put into it. we all know that the 360 can do better than cel shading, but crackdown devs chose to do it. ghost recon looks very good, eragon looks like crap. it's all about the developer's effort.
I "THINK"<---DO YOU SEE THIS? the reason they won't give out the specs is because the RSX is inferior to 360's Xenos, but on the other hand the Cell is likely more powerful than the Xenon. Why else have they released the specs of the Cell but not the RSX?
have said the cell is slightly stronger/faster and able to do more at once. those same devs also said the 360 gpu was slightly stronger and will pull away from the ps3 in the future. as you can clearly see, sony fans only want to listen to the part that favors their position. both systems with their various strengths and weaknesses will be virtually equal in terms of hardware. the real difference between them is exclusive titles and personal preference.
I don't care about the RSX. You guys are crazy. You hold on to URL's from years ago. Games and functions are the bottom line.
The rsx is based on the geforce 7900 gtx series. I don't know the reason why the specs hasn't gone puplic my best guess would be that it is because the pc is already superior, and that it's equal or actually slower than the 360 gpu, which contains newer technology such as sm 4.0.
about th ram. the xbox os use in total 32 mb ram that mean it got total of 480 mb ram. The ps3 use in total for it's os, 96 mb of ram, which gives it 416 mb in total
So that allows devs to take advantage of heavy-duty caching. Not as fast as RAM, but a lot faster than reading off a DVD/Blu-ray disc. As for operating system size, there was leaked information from a while back, but unfortunately that info was never followed up.
I do know that with the PS2 Sony gave a big number on how large the operating system would be, but mostly out of anticipation. The final operating system only ended up taking half the amount of space they had required at first, something that developers actually talked about when this leaked information was released.
It might still be 96MB, but most likely it's been trimmed down as usual. Probably only by a small amount though considering the multitude of features it has, and crazy amount of things it has to multitask at.
As for the RSX, I'm pretty sure it's based off of 7900GTX tech, but its HDR capabilities are from something that hasn't been released yet. Current ATI and nVidia cards run 32 and 64-bit HDR, while the RSX does 128-bit HDR rendering. (it was co-developed with ILM) There's obviously certain things in the RSX that nVidia doesn't want us to really know about; makes sense since they want the competition to stay at least one step behind.
As far as I know the Xenos runs SM 3.0 (if it's 4.0 I must've missed an update or something).
I truly believe that while ATI put in a good, innovative GPU in the 360, it's the CPU and bandwidth architecture that's holding it back. The ED-RAM idea is great, but seems like it was built as a patch to fight the bandwidth problem; it's also held back by its small size. I look at the 360 and see quite a bit of potential, but the system design flaws hold it back which is kinda disheartening. O well, it's too late now. =/
you have a little spunk on your lip. Now you are using the HDD as a back up. YOu sony fans are too funny. You should quit your day job and become stand ups.
Just weird that Sony really pushes about the Cell, Blu-Ray, but yet is very quiet about the RSX. I really don't care because its all about the games and as it stands they're pretty much even.
"But the PS3 has the HDD as standard" what the? Come on you smarter than this, how are you going to mix things up. I have a computer with more than 1TB(2 HD) in my house and I can't play any new game on it. Anybody that knows a thing or 2 about gamming knows that HD space means sh** for games. It is important, but the most important component on any game system is the Video Card, not matter how you put it. Also, you shouldn't be talking about Sony's GPU specs since wherever you know is more a rumor than a fact since Sony refuses to released the official specs. If it would be Microsoft trying to hide the specs on the GPU and not Sony it would be an outrage. So, until Sony releases the information, the PS3 GPU is inferior to the 360 one. Besides, that’s what developers are saying. "but seems like it was built as a patch to fight the bandwidth problem; it's also held back by its small size. I look at the 360 and see quite a bit of potential, but the system design flaws hold it back which is kind of disheartening." you speak of this like if this would be a fact. Can you prove there is a flaw on the design? can you show me how Gears Of War shows sign of this?
I will tell you a little secret, you see the people that worked on the 360 GPU... those little people called Microsoft and ATI, they are a lot smarter than you. This is what they do for a living. This is funny, all of the sudden you have the super power of knowing everything about the 360 GPU+CPU. Do you have the proper instrumentation to test this? Please, DJ you are not as smart as you think you are. Wow! Some people learn how to install Linux and they think they are Neo from the Matrix.
WTF is sony playing at TELL US THE RSX SPECS PLZ what are you hiding sony,the world wants to know
LMAO nice pos,you tell DJ how it is most of these fanboys dont have a clue what there talking about.Theres some talk that the rsx is based of the 7600gt not the 7900 sony would have you believe,but we will wait and see but its looking more and more like a modifed 7600 folks,watch this space
Mine is this, sony hasn't talked about RSX for a while now. Wonder why? cause it had to lower the mhz from 550 to 500? maybe. Maybe it's actuall core design is a 7900gtx.?? Well according Chief Scientist at NVIDIA http://www.bit-tech.net/bit... the rsx core design is a 7800gtx a G70. In this article they talk about the Future of video games. Keep in mind this is all from nvidia; They talk about the stuff of hdr and aa and all those things. Well unreal engine 3 is finally out (Gears of War) and its impressive. Current Nvidia cards Can't do HDR and AA at the same time.
Now fast foward to today http://www.gamingnexus.com/... and now we have the first ever G80 Nvidia card. And wow is it a beast. It now finally for the fist time ever has Unified shader design(360has it also), it can finally do HDR + AA at the same time(360also), and can now allow 128bit HDR precision. I would like someone to refer me to a link when i can read about the RSX having 128bit HDR. I wont believe it will i read it. So there a few things as to why maybe sony keeps the RSX quite. I think they don't want to seem as outdated as New gen and dx10 cards are unified shaders(ala 360). Sony isn't dumb but most comsumers aren't also. That is just my opinion.
Those were some excellent points you both made, good info!
WOW, I have to say that DJ is pretty brave to try to slant this as being good news, or as he put it Nvidia/Sony "it makes sense since they want the competition to stay one step behind", yep thats it DJ, Sony wouldn't possibly tell the world how much more advance the RSX is than anything else out there becuase its a "secret" to stay "one step ahead" of the competition even though their GPU spec's are finalized and *ALREADY BEING UTILIZED* in the finished product.
DJ, Im just wondering....given Sony's tactics in the past have you even considered for one second that Sony might be withholding RSX's specs because they are less than impressive compared to the competition....I'm not saying that its a 100% certainty, I don't know any more than you do, but common sense seems to point to that conclusion....and if I'm wrong I will be the first to say it....and congratulate Sony giving consumers a nice surprise that they didn't expect....OVER-DELIVERING!.... but given how things have played out in the past it seems highly unlikely. It won't be long before the system arrives here in the good old U.S., and I'm sure the RSX will be examined pretty soon by a creditable source, so we will see....and if it turns out to be negative, remember that its Sony fault for making it a bigger deal than it is, since they never released the spec's prior to luanch....of course if its great news they should recieve all the praise, but if its not then I'll be the first to call it what it is "A CHEAP MARKETING TRICK!" -not informing the consumer of exactly what they are getting.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.